re: Sports Illustrated Article About Fulton

The staff has been the best. I know people on this site shite on Joe but he’s been supportive. My boy wil be okay.

“At worst, Fulton will have two years of eligibility remaining starting in 2019. He burned a year by playing in just three games as a freshman in 2016, a fractured right ring finger midway through the season holding him back. He used 2017, the first year of his suspension, as a redshirt. He’ll burn 2018 if the case is not reopened.”

He was allowed to REDSHIRT in year 1 of the suspension, so even if the suspension holds up for this season, 2018, he will still have 2 years of eligibility left.

Just clearing that up for some that didn’t read the article

god I love Ross Dellenger.

The only argument for the NCAA’s position is that “those are the rules.” The problem with that argument is that it only flies if people know this. According to the article, Fulton’s attorney says he was “unable to find a case of the NCAA suspending an athlete for tampering with a two-year penalty.” The NCAA spokesman, Mary Wilfred, apparently in rebuttal, says there have been but she cannot cite them. Six major college coaches that spoke to SI had never heard of the rule. A FORMER NCAA INVESTIGATOR Tim Nevius is on the record saying he never heard of this rule.

If a city were to announce that driving drunk resulted in a six month suspended license but driving Sober with a radar detector resulted in a one year suspension, you might say, “gosh that’s harsh. You’d think the drunk driver who is endangering lives would be more severely punished. But now that it’s the rule AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT, that’s the risk you take if you keep a radar detector.”

Now imagine that the law is passed by the city council in a closed door meeting. It wasn’t publicized and no one ever got pulled over and charged for it (or if they did, it likewise wasn’t publicized). You get pulled over going 34 in a 35 because unbeknownst to you, your taillight is out. Cop comes up and cites you for it and then notices your radar detector and arrests you like a drunk driver. You go to court and in the case before you, a guy with 3x the legal limit gets his license revoked for 6 months. You’re up next and the judge reads you the riot act. You tell him you had no idea about the law and you think the punishment is excessive. You promise never to use a radar detector again. But the judge says the law is the law, suspends your license for a year.

That’s what we’re talking about here. A rule that no one knows about, that is overly harsh and that could severely jeopardize a talented player’s career. It’s ridiculous. And I would say it if it were a Bama player too.

You don’t need to know the punishment to know it’s wrong. Knowing the punishment is rather irrelevant. That is a desperation move

The biggest thing he has going for him is that he passed the test.

quote:

---

I'm so conflicted in this story. But if they didn't use the tampered urine then he shouldn't have gotten that suspension. To quote one of my favorite TV shows. "Oil changes, oil changes for everybody!"

---

How are y’all confused?

He tried to use fake urine until he was caught

Regardless if he passed the test, the punishment for trying to cheat a drug test has to be more severe than actually failing the test. If not, everyone would simply try to cheat it

I think 2 years is too harsh, but I understand the logic behind it

“The rule states...”

No one has seen this rule. That’s the point. Read the article. It is a rule that the NCAA has but doesn’t publicize. No one is saying he shouldn’t be punished. But every other sports outlet’s rule is that if you try to hide it and get caught you are automatically guilty of the underlying offense. Only the NCAA makes the penalty TWICE as punitive. And no one knew about it until they levied this punishment on Fulton.

It’s nuts.

quote:

---

No one has seen this rule. That’s the point. Read the article. It is a rule that the NCAA has but doesn’t publicize. No one is saying he shouldn’t be punished. But every other sports outlet’s rule is that if you try to hide it and get caught you are automatically guilty of the underlying offense. Only the NCAA makes the penalty TWICE as punitive. And no one knew about it until they levied this punishment on Fulton.

---

If it's a rule it's published somewhere.

I read the article. He should have gone to his coaches and not an upperclassmen like his mother said in the article you are telling me to read. If he does that this RULE is a non factor.

I understand it is crazy, thanks for informing me.

quote:

---

LSU should provide this information clearly to student athletes.

---

They do. The compliance department holds meetings where they explain the LSU and NCAA drug testing policies and have the athletes sign the paperwork. There isn't an excuse there.